Why Can't I Own a Canadian?--A Religious Letter

Originally posted by Phedreus
I am of the opinion that the OP has been watching to many west wing reruns. The simple facts are rather undeniable. homsexuality is abnormal to the
species at large. many religions condemn the act. homosexuals represent less than .001% of the population. Muslim nations treat them far more harshly
than we ever thought of.

In this case, your information is incorrect. According to Gallup and a few other polls, anywhere from 2% to 10% of the population is gay. www.gallup.com...

Not sure where you got your figures from, but you're WAYYY off. Even by the conservative polls.

you posted .. Freedom of speech. It may be annoying but if you curtail freedom of speech for one group, it'll happen for others.

They have organized a whole machine to go after them and dig up any kind of dirt on them in order to censor/reprimand them in the media...or
press. And the press goes along with it. And the media in this country is a shill for the body politic. I call this a default setting...like this
computer..it is allowed to play through...unquestioned ..unchallenged by opposing views.

Please prove this. The only group I know of that has actually been caught doing this are the scientologists.

The concept of what I am speaking ..is obviously very difficult for you to fathom in your emotive state.

You're doing again to me what you're claiming "they" are doing to others

Look, you've been busted my friend. Time to man up and just say you're wrong. I know it can be tough but you're an adult right? I know you have
it in you

And now here in drama you attempt to broaden out your Hitler technique by implying I am a racist and don't like black people.

Just applying your own logic

You are scrapping the bottom of the barrel in attempting your own method to do what this person Perez Hilton did to the contestant. I finally
look up the name.
It does not work on me. You need to get out more. To practice real enlightenment, intelligence, and tolerance.

Another example of you trying to do to me what you're again claiming "they" are doing to others

Could you post an example with source showing "them" attempting to censor someone?

I am astonished that you should even ask this question after how this group and the media shilling for them treated this woman.

They did not censor her. She spoke her mind. Sometimes when you say things others do not like, there are consequences. What you're suggesting is
that we should be able to say whatever we want and in any venue without any consequences at all. Using your logic, for example, a man should be able
to walk up to a female co-worker and tell her she has a really nice rack without any consequences.

Honestly I'm not going to keep going back and forth with you. By your posts, it's obvious you have a hatred for homosexuals and this is how you're
venting it. You're doing exactly what you're claiming "they" are doing to others so I see hatred AND hypocrisy on your part.

We need to learn to live with many different types of people because they're not going to go away. I hope you'll be able to see this one day

So you are willing to have your name and home address given to the main stream media? You are ok posting your name and address on the internet so
anyone and everyone who disagrees with you can come to your home 24/7? So crowds of people can come to your home day and night and carry on for weeks
and weeks? Really?

Could you please post a video of the MSM giving out her home address? Obviously because she's in the public eye, everyone can easily find out her
name.

Originally posted by alienreality
This was God's new agreement with humanity to follow Christ.

And where is THAT written down?

it is pasted all over the NEW Testament.... read it,, and no I won't feed it to you on a silver spoon either

I will. Wrote it myself, years ago. Hope everyone likes it. To date, nobody's told me they
found a flaw in it. Let's see how ATS can tear it apart...

It occurs to me I should explain. The essay is about why being gay isn't a sin, but it explains why and when the Leviticus laws, aka the Mosaic Laws,
were sort of redacted by God. I've changed the link to go to that part of it. Carry on.

I think we are getting off on a wrong foot here. I too am a strong supporter of free speech. I am not a supporter of entitlement beliefs to the point
where some think it trumps the free speech of others. Hence I am not a supporter of those with high strung emotions to support their entitlement
beliefs over free speech.

And by many of the posts I see on ATS/BTS..there are people out here who believe and conduct themselves as if their emotions and entitlement beliefs
justify dragging others through the mud and making them pay for expressing their beliefs through free speech.

What I am not in favor of is the obvious bullying by these groups supported by the media and the body politic operating privily through these media
shills.

I also believe that there is a growing number of the public catching on to this misused and abused technique by these groups, including the media, to
default through. And they are beginning to distrust the motives of not only these groups..but the media as well.

When the media and this group began to dig through her personal life in order to smear her, make an obvious example of her, they were way out of line.
And this was done because they did not approve of her statements in this beauty contest. They were willing to destroy her in order to get their
way..unquestioned and unchallenged. I don't find this enlightenment, intelligence, or free speech. I find it to be bullying and intimidation....as I
said..in an earlier..post..a gang bang.

This is the attempt as censorship...rebuke, reprimand..and even bullying of which I am speaking. Not the public disapproval.

It is this kind of personal attack of which I disapprove of by this group and for obvious political lucre. To me it is obvious bullying, censorship,
and politics. This was a beauty contest..not a political forum.

I found nothing beautiful or enlightening about how this Perez Hilton attempted to hijack the contest for their personal political platform.
I found Perez Hilton to be anything but discrete and or intelligent in asking this emotionally charged question. I found him to be a cheap
politician.
I also found him to be a baiter and a hater. Very intolerant of others.
And especially when he admits that he began immediately the process of moving the machine into operation/fanned the flames by way of his blog.

I found this contestants answer to be genuine, honest, and not a lie or deception in order to stay in the contest...or deceive to get public
support..in other words a political answer..which is what I detect Perez Hilton would have preferred. And this told me that it was Perez Hilton who is
suspect in motives and also reaction to her answer.

I do not respond well to theatrics and drama. And this obviously turned into a mudslinging drama fest..and with the media as willing partners. I
greatly disapprove of a media which has become a willing shill in the process rather than impartial reporting. Hence I have little faith in the
media...all of them.

I do not also respond well to drama and mudslinging techniques by posters. Usually I let them go until I've seen enough of this type of drama
technique rather than mature intelligent posting.

When someone has to tell me to get on the bandwagon to enlightenment...this usually tells me that they are a follower..not a leader and their brand of
enlightenment even intelligence is highly suspect. It usually is an indicator that they are emotional and highly dramatic in lieu of debate points.

This is the origin of my statement here of which you quote..

They are not in favor of this kind of free speech. That is obvious to people who can think for themselves.

I am not a big bandwagon type person. I am also something else for which emotional type people ..of entitlement minds..have difficulty understanding
or relating to as is evidenced by many posts on this thread. I am Salty..not sugary.
Emotional type sugary people..with more social beliefs and entitlement..have great difficulty dealing with Salty type people and must use/misuse their
emotional entitlement to attempt to cubbyhole us into their pet niches in order to justify their emotions/beliefs. It does not work with peoples who
can think and respond outside of this arena.
This is how you learn what is tolerant and intolerant. How you learn that these sugary, social entitlement peoples are not tolerant at all..and it
does not take long for them to verify this in their postings...as was the clear case with Perez Hilton. Tolerance for me but not for thee.

I live in Canada so up here she could've faced some legal ramifications depending on how she phrased it but I don't agree with hate speech
laws because I think that it just feeds the haters victim based rhetoric. I'm a stronger supporter of free speech than most and I don't see how
anybody's right to free speech was infringed upon here

It is worse than this currently in England and Canada is soon to follow. So too is the USA..in "enlightenment." Translate that to read
censorship.

I too don't agree with hate speech laws..nor hate crime laws. It is either a crime or it is not.

When you turn a whole machine on an individual as was done to this woman...you use coercion and bullying techniques to attempt to silence this person
and anyone else who would desire to express their views..thus limiting free speech. It is only one more step to codifying this into law. Thus the step
to limiting free speech was begun long before the law was passed.

When ever you put a machine in force to intimidate people in the manner as was done to this woman ..you are well down the road to loss of free
speech.

Really? I must not be seeing the same things you are because every day I see people displaying their sexuality. Walk into a park, see a couple
kissing? walk down the street, see that Husband and Wife holding hands...

As to that "unwilling public", well that doesn't hold any water because at one time that "unwilling public" didn't want women to vote or lets
Blacks sit in the front of the bus.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by Helmkat]

Helmkat,

I agree with you here. You are definitely not seeing what I am seeing.

The quote has to do with forcing acceptance on an unwilling public.
You obviously interpret it to mean what you think and are in favor of hence you like many...see only what you want to see.

Like jfj123 you must use the drama technique of sticking others..especially those with whom you disagree... back into a time warp to support your
argument. I am also very familiar with the time warp technique to support drama. Lots of people use or misuse it to make others feel guilty or less.
It too does not work on me. Not interested in guilt techniques. Others have overly used/misused this technique to the point of nausea.

No problem once again..I merely make note of it to the readers out here.

What I am discussing here is the attempt at forced acceptance or silencing of any question or opposition to this issue.
My other point is that these people..the unwilling public... do not define themselves by their sexuality as a standard for "Forced Acceptance." One
has to be educated to be that naturally dumb.

People on their own ..are not naturally that dumb.

I will give you an example of dumb. Why would you automatically assume holding hands is a sign of sexuality??
I have held hands with women and not been sexual with them.
I have done the same with children...this does not automatically ..by default mean I am sexual with them.

I have also escorted women with the crook of my arm held out to them. This does not mean I am sexual with them.

Not everyone out here automatically thinks through the flesh Helmkat.

Holding hands is often and by history a sign and symbol of a type of security ....confidence..trust...particularly towards those socially considered
more vulnerable than others....not automatically a sign of sexuality.

Only public education standards paid for by government and shilled for by the news media can dumb a people down so far that they automatically assume
holding hands is a sign of sexuality.

Also Helmkat...most of the pubic I see holding hands or not are not trying to exclusively use or misuse their sexuality to declare themselves
acceptable...or demand acceptance. This is incredibly stupid of someone to use this sexuality as a standard of excellence or acceptance in
anything.

What is with all this repeated reference to "drama"? Is that a not so discreet barb towards gay persons who you see as being overly dramatic. You
must have used that term a hundred times here so far (am I being overly dramatic? lol)

You talk about holding hands not being sexual. If you saw two men walking down any street in America, holding hands, what would be your automatic
assumption? Of course you would make assumptions about their sexuality.and you would be appauled.

If only you could step back and see your hypocrisy. You speak out of both sides of your mouth and do everything you accuse gay people of doing. I
believe that is called "projection" (of your faults onto others.)

Please prove this. The only group I know of that has actually been caught doing this are the scientologists.

I already did in this case of the beauty contestant. We are going to see this template again in an organized orchestrated manner and including the
news media. A real circus...act of emotions.

I said..

The concept of what I am speaking ..is obviously very difficult for you to fathom in your emotive state.

and you replied..

You're doing again to me what you're claiming "they" are doing to others
Look, you've been busted my friend. Time to man up and just say you're wrong. I know it can be tough but you're an adult right? I know you have it
in you

Now here this proves what I stated above. Not that you are going to pay attention to it..but once again I post it for the readers out here about your
emotive state. Here....

I said..

And now here in drama you attempt to broaden out your Hitler technique by implying I am a racist and don't like black people.

Like I told Helmkat, others before you have so used and misused this "Victim/time warp technique in an attempt to make others look guilty...it gets
olde once you have trained yourself to spot it.

Here in the states...Jesse Jackson and ...Al Sharpton often use and imply using this technique to stick others way back in a time warp of guilt to
control and censor them.

Among the women and feminists..it is what I call the Burka victim technique..combined with time warp techniques to get over and silence others. Any
time now ..all the women in this country will be forced to wear burkas...and go back to the kitchen. This too is censorship..veiled but censorship..by
both guilt and time warp techniques.

With Jesse and Al...slavery is right around the corner..we are on the brink of going back to slavery....so everyone else is guilty of some moral
ethical crime...and we get to play through by default and on the backs of the body politic and media. More time warp and guilt censorship attempts.

My point here is that it is all the same related technique when you think it through. Hence when I see this method used and misused..I think it is the
same "Usual Suspects" groomed in the same school of guilt default techniques. You can see them coming after awhile. Which is what I could see coming
in your posts.

Who is busted here? I even see the media parroting out these same time warp and guilt techniques. So too from time to time does the body politic and
public education..paid for and financed by the body politic.

Who is busted??

They did not censor her. She spoke her mind.

She did indeed speak her mind..and she was very graceful about it. The response in reprimand/censorship was not graceful in return. It was rude and
uncivil. IN this manner ...reprimand it was censorship.

Obviously you and I have a totally different definition of censorship.

You might want to check out how the the US Congress..censors or reprimands their members when they carry out conduct which is considered out of
bounds.

I think this is the source of lot of the confusion and emotions going on here...on your part ..not mine.

This woman was gracious and civil in her reply to a question asked by one of the judges in this contest. This reaction by the judge and the machine of
entitlement in place clearly shows motives and methods as well as entitlement beliefs and the religion behind it. The very devout zeal of the
practitioners of this religion. And you confirm this by your posts and posting technique. Once again I point this out to the readers out here.

What you're suggesting is that we should be able to say whatever we want and in any venue without any consequences at all. Using your
logic, for example, a man should be able to walk up to a female co-worker and tell her she has a really nice rack without any consequences.

I am not suggesting this at all..You and many other posters are suggesting this yourselves...while accusing me of the same. Your logic and rationale
based on your entitlement beliefs is skewing your thought process.
You are showing your bias and intolerance here. You are also showing your inability to think and reason outside the flesh. In the spirit..in the soul.
Hence you are showing your very soul to me. What motivates you ..how and why you think the way you do. Not only that ..but you clearly show the drama
behind how you justify your thinking and beliefs.
And it is very irrational. But it is drama.

I am saying that this woman in the contest was civil and honest in her answer to a question asked by one of the judges.
You sir..are suggesting that this woman's speech has consequences and can be censored by your emotional requirements and entitlement beliefs ..even
though this woman gave a honest civil answer to the question asked by one of the judges. This is intolerance. And yet this group and you are demanding
tolerance from others. What you are doing and how you are going about it ..does not even make good nonsense to those who can see, hear, and think for
themselves.
And thinking people know and can see this for what it is...coercion..bullying...intimidation..in addition to very uncivil and intolerant behavior..and
particularly by one of the judges in this contest.

And you sir..try to justify your position by comparing an opposing view to Hitler..racism and anything else your emotions can conjure up to justify
your beliefs/emotions/entitlements.

It does not bother me one bit that you choose to go this route. I merely take the opportunity to point this out to the readers that you and this
movement are intolerant ..the very thing you demand from others....you do not extend to others. Yet you attempt to smear them by these shallow guilt
and time warp entitlement techniques.
I have seen this so much in public education, politics, and on blogs that it becomes predictable and like radar ..one can see it coming.

jfj123 you are certainly permitted to voice your opinion ..complete with emotions, time warp and even guilt techniques if you choose to do so on this
forum. I merely point out the methods, rationale and goals in how and why this is done for the readers out here such that they will spot in all across
this country/board/boards the next time it happens.

Hope it helps some out here to spot it when next it occurs..and it will...with predictability.

No problem again ..that our discourse is over. Bon Appetit as they say in France.

What is with all this repeated reference to "drama"? Is that a not so discreet barb towards gay persons who you see as being overly dramatic. You
must have used that term a hundred times here so far (am I being overly dramatic? lol)

You talk about holding hands not being sexual. If you saw two men walking down any street in America, holding hands, what would be your automatic
assumption? Of course you would make assumptions about their sexuality.and you would be appauled.

If only you could step back and see your hypocrisy. You speak out of both sides of your mouth and do everything you accuse gay people of doing. I
believe that is called "projection" (of your faults onto others.)

Wayno,

DRAMA,

That is what I call it when someone posting has more drama and drama techniques to illustrate their positions than they have logic and reason. And
also what I call it when someones logic and reason are based on their emotions and insecurities verses real logic and reason.

If you saw two men walking down any street in America, holding hands, what would be your automatic assumption?

My automatic assumption is that it is none of my business Wayno. Same with anyone else holding hands or going out and about with their families.

It is you who are making an assumption here just like jfj123 in order to justify your position. No problem with me. Once again I make note of it.

Now when they try to force my acceptance of their sexuality on me or thier beliefs...that is a different thing. Same with a hetero couple forcing
their acceptance or sexuality or beliefs on me. And that is what I protest here. I wont buy into it by either because I think it is stupid to force
acceptance of people by their sexuality...hetero or homo..both. And I have stated so. I believe this is a very dumb and ignorant nonstandard by which
to follow. I am not interested in it from anyone.

When I think 'Canadian' - I think of Robin from that show 'How I met your mother'.... what an awesome girl. Oh, and the episode when she
pretends to be on the side of another hockey team, when in fact- she is Canadian..... And something about Canadians being afraid of the dark....

even the gay community will tell you that those numbers are inflated by those who are 1. g.t.g. gay till graduation, 2, those that simple act gay
for one reason or another, 3. those caught up in the chic of being thought gay.

What is with all this repeated reference to "drama"? Is that a not so discreet barb towards gay persons who you see as being overly dramatic. You
must have used that term a hundred times here so far (am I being overly dramatic? lol)

This is how tom uses the "drama technique" himself which makes him a hypocrite

Of course he doesn't see this because he's too busy accusing us
of using these "techniques" to forward our opinions

I'm using your logic so if it's faulty as you claim, you're then claiming your own logic is faulty

OOPS AGAIN

Your bad

And again you claim my points are laced with drama/emotions to justify my positions when you're doing the same thing. I again only point this out
for the other readers since you obviously cannot see this yourself

Like I told Helmkat, others before you have so used and misused this "Victim/time warp technique in an attempt to make others look guilty...it
gets olde once you have trained yourself to spot it.

And another example of you doing EXACTLY what you're claiming we are doing

I like the way you try and elevate yourself above us by letting us
know that you've trained yourself to spot these "techniques" that lesser people use

Your insinuation is that you can't be tricked by us
because you're smarter

Among the women and feminists..it is what I call the Burka victim technique..

oooh I like this part. Here is where you actually state that this "technique" you yourself has actually named. At this point I'm going to assume
you've made up all of these "techniques"

Who is busted here?

Well since you asked... YOU again

She did indeed speak her mind..and she was very graceful about it. The response in reprimand/censorship was not graceful in return. It was rude
and uncivil. IN this manner ...reprimand it was censorship.

She wasn't censored. You're just not getting this. She could talk about it all she wanted.

Obviously you and I have a totally different definition of censorship.

I go by the legal definition as applied in The United States of America.

Based on what you've said, I would assume that you also think that glen beck is being censored since there is a campaign right now to get him off he
air.

I have seen this so much in public education, politics, and on blogs that it becomes predictable and like radar ..one can see it
coming.

I like this one too

Here once again, you try to elevate yourself while putting the rest of us down

I have seen this so much and it becomes
predictable and like radar...one can see it coming

It's amazing how often I can use your own words against you

orangatom/rick, "you are certainly permitted to voice your opinion ..complete with emotions, time warp and even guilt techniques if you choose to do
so on this forum. I merely point out the methods, rationale and goals in how and why this is done for the readers out here such that they will spot in
all across this country/board/boards the next time it happens."

"Hope it helps some out here to spot it when next it occurs..and it will...with predictability."

I hope you get something out of this.
Have a great weekend orangatom/rick

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.